From what I gather, the affair was documented by the FBI, which Obama had spying on him back when he was running the show in Afghanistan. But, supposedly, he's been asked to resign now, because people with high-level security clearances having affairs are security risks.

I call bullshit. If this were the case, why would he have been appointed Director of the Central Intelligence Agency by the Obama Administration, who already knew about the affair and did nothing about it? Also, it's okay for the President to get blow jobs in the Oval Office, but it's grounds for dismissal if one of his subordinates halfway across the world fighting a war to engage in a little hanky-panky? What's up with that? It's certainly not about security clearances.

I'll tell you what this is about. Petraeus didn't play along with the White House cover-up of what happened in Benghazi. I would bet money that, shortly after the incident, when the White House was getting its story straignt and telling everybody what the story was going to be (i.e., it was just a riot resulting from a YouTube video, which the State Department played along with), Patraeus decided he was going to tell the truth (which the CIA did, even though it didn't agree with Obama's lame story). At that point, they probably whipped out this information about his affair and used it to rein him in. He's too much of a professional to complain about it, embarrassing his chain of command.

In fact, they may have already been holding it over his head, as leverage to get him to take the CIA job and not run against Obama in this past election.

Now that the election is past, but before the scandal can re-emerge, Patraeus is being done away with to strip him of power. Rather than simply ask for his resignation and spare him the embarrassment of public revelation of his affair, it is being played as the reason for the resignation, to hopefully tarnish him enough that, should he consider running in 2016, he's got at least that baggage.

And then Obama takes off the next day for a trip to fricking Burma -- the one place on planet, short of North Korea, where he can go and have zero chance of being ambushed with questions by one of those annoying people from the "free press". It's also a good red herring. Watch how the mainstream media go on and on about the history and mystery of "Myanmar", while completely ignoring the President's blatant cover-up of the disaster in Benghazi and what it implies about the childishly naive foreign policy he and co-amateur Hillary came up with. Like the President of the U.S. needs to be visiting Burma with the "fiscal cliff" only weeks away. wtf

I don't know David Petraeus, but I know people who do, and everyone has always spoken very, very highly of him, saying he's one of the most intelligent and caring people they have ever met. It's a pity to see this happen to him, whether my theory is correct or not. (I should add that while I know people who know him, I have absolutely zero inside information on this and have not heard anyone's opinion on this matter. What I'm saying here comes from me and me alone.)

Last edited by Bones McCracker on Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:33 pm; edited 5 times in total

Supposedly he was about to testify on Benghazi. Unless he testifies (which he still should), then that is certainly what it was about. There is no way HIS extramarital affair is such a threat to security that it couldn't wait until AFTER his testimony. Once it is public, the threat to security is gone._________________lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

Boney, do you think the East Coast news media will continue to carry Obama's water?

My feeling is that come hell or high water the White House Press Corps will continue to follow the White House's narrative._________________The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.
George Orwell

Yeah. The White House blurts all kinds of classified information about that operation, and then blurts again and fucks up a whole op in Yemen, but these brave and way underpaid men deserve punishment for giving some advice to video game makers.

Boney, do you think the East Coast news media will continue to carry Obama's water?

My feeling is that come hell or high water the White House Press Corps will continue to follow the White House's narrative.

I believe they will. However, there are always ambitious, young reporters out there looking to become the next Woodward & Bernstein. They'll have to wait until the President gets back from freaking Burma, though, if they want to ask him about any of this.

By the way, do reporters still get to ask the President questions? When was the last time we saw that happen?

They'll have to wait until the President gets back from freaking Burma

Smells like the Indonesian arm of the family reunion.

Sounds more like the White House knows a crisis when they see one, and they whisked him off somewhere where the press can't get at him until they figure out how they're going to deal with it, or to keep him distanced from whatever they've decided to do about it.

Old School: When is Petraeus scheduled to testify about Libya?

I just listened to a bit of Piers Morgan's show on CNN. He seems suspicious, and was asking probing questions of some guests. One of them said "there's more going on here than an affair". That's as far as they wanted to get into that. They don't have the balls to speculate that it has anything to do with Benghazi. Then they cut away to another person and were asking stupid questions like, "Was security put at risk by this affair?" and so on. They're not ready to "go there", apparently.

Last edited by Bones McCracker on Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:34 pm; edited 1 time in total

so he retires for being unreliable in his relationship - and you blame Obama with the rest of the Obama hating posse falling into line.

Impressive.

I find it odd that you, as european, would think that having affair outside marriage would be reason enough for a politician to resign his post. Isn't that something that european ethos was supposed to have transcended, and indeed used to laugh at when it came to UK politicians and their "affairs"?

so he retires for being unreliable in his relationship - and you blame Obama with the rest of the Obama hating posse falling into line.

Impressive.

I find it odd that you, as european, would think that having affair outside marriage would be reason enough for a politician to resign his post. Isn't that something that european ethos was supposed to have transcended, and indeed used to laugh at when it came to UK politicians and their "affairs"?

he is not a politician but was head of CIA. And yes, I would expect the head of such an agency retire. Because such an affair makes him susceptible to blackmail. Do YOU want to take that risk?_________________Study finds stunning lack of racial, gender, and economic diversity among middle-class white males

You European Tools are so intellectually dishonest as to not even be deserving of a real debate._________________The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.
George Orwell

You European Tools are so intellectually dishonest as to not even be deserving of a real debate.

Yes, because this just screams of being free from bias and full of intellectual honesty:

Old School wrote:

Hope and Change

The most transparent administration

Chicago Democrat politics at it's consummate best

You're just butt-hurt because your guy lost and now you have some stupid avatar. Lashing out those evil blue states and the the European commies isn't going to change that for you.

You are totally wrong. I voted for Gary Johnson, not Romney, and I voted Obama four years ago. Plus, I like my avatar. Do you have something against gay people, Republicans, or just gay Republicans?

If you substituted the name George Bush for Barack Obama over the past four years, the usual suspects on this forum would be going nuts.
For example:
Assassinating an American citizen who was on the President's hit list. All without due process. Total quiet from the usual suspects. Tell me with a straight face the usual suspects would have remained quiet if it were a Republican.

As I said, the usual suspects are total political tools and intellectually dishonest. Pathetic._________________The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.
George Orwell

If you substituted the name George Bush for Barack Obama over the past four years, the usual suspects on this forum would be going nuts.
For example:
Assassinating an American citizen who was on the President's hit list. All without due process. Total quiet from the usual suspects. Tell me with a straight face the usual suspects would have remained quiet if it were a Republican.

Conversely, the other "usual suspects" for the right wing contingent would be busy justifying if it was a republican. Thoughtless bias, devoid of any logic, exist on both sides of the fence. It's not exclusive to the guys that you don't agree with.

You've been on something of a tear lately with the myopic one-liners. Things alright?